Alves Luana, de Novais Francisco José, da Silva Arthur Nery, Araujo Michelle Silva, Bernardino Thiago, Osowski Germana Vizzotto, Zanella Ricardo, Lee Settles Matthew, Holmes Mark A, Fukumasu Heidge, Ruiz Vera Letticie de Azevedo, Zanella Adroaldo José
Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo, Pirassununga, Brazil.
Department of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Animal Science and Food Engineering, University of São Paulo, Pirassununga, Brazil.
Front Genet. 2022 Apr 8;13:836962. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2022.836962. eCollection 2022.
The United Kingdom and European Union have banned crates for pregnant sows. However, animals are kept in a restrictive environment for up to four weeks after mating, leading to stress and different responses of the animals' immune system. Here, we used vaginal flushing of gilts to investigate whether housing systems or an experimental inflammatory challenge with lipopolysaccharide (LPS) can modify the gilt vaginal microbiome. Alpha-diversity indices showed differences in the microbiota of gilts housed under different systems ( = 0.04). Shannon alpha-diversity richness was higher in gilts group-housed in pens than in gilts housed in crates ( = 0.035), but not higher than in other groups. The relative abundance of the operational taxonomic unit (OTU) ( < 0.05) revealed specific differences in housing systems before a LPS or saline (SAL control) challenge. We found different abundances in taxa of , , , , and in gilts housed in the different systems before challenge. After the LPS challenge, significant differences were detected in the relative abundance of OTUs ( < 0.05) for the LPS-challenged group compared with SAL animals for each housing system. The phylum showed higher abundance among the LPS-challenged gilts than in SAL-challenged animals. Furthermore, was more abundant in the LPS-challenged gilts housed in crates than in SAL-challenged gilts housed in crates. and were more abundant in LPS-challenged gilts in indoor group housing than in SAL gilts in the same housing system. Gilts kept outdoors did not show changes in vaginal microbiota after an LPS challenge. Gilts housed in crates showed clinical signs of urogenital infection, whereas gilts housed outdoors and in indoor group housing did not. The relationship between environment, immune response, and microbiota suggested that animals in a poor environments experience difficulties responding to a challenge and their vaginal microbiota is altered as a consequence, with decreased richness of normal vaginal microbiota, and increased opportunistic bacteria. Welfare indicators measured by gilts' responses to housing systems however, do not fully explain mechanisms associated with the unique signature in vaginal microbiota encountered in the different housing systems.
英国和欧盟已禁止使用妊娠母猪限位栏。然而，动物在配种后会被限制在一个环境中长达四周，这会导致应激以及动物免疫系统的不同反应。在此，我们通过对后备母猪进行阴道冲洗，来研究饲养系统或用脂多糖（LPS）进行实验性炎症刺激是否会改变后备母猪的阴道微生物群。α多样性指数显示，不同饲养系统下后备母猪的微生物群存在差异（P = 0.04）。圈养在栏舍中的后备母猪的香农α多样性丰富度高于限位栏饲养的后备母猪（P = 0.035），但不高于其他组。在LPS或生理盐水（SAL对照）刺激前，可操作分类单元（OTU）的相对丰度（P < 0.05）揭示了饲养系统中的特定差异。我们发现在刺激前，不同饲养系统下的后备母猪中，埃希氏菌属、志贺氏菌属、肠杆菌属、克雷伯氏菌属和葡萄球菌属的分类群丰度不同。LPS刺激后，与每个饲养系统中的SAL动物相比，LPS刺激组的OTU相对丰度存在显著差异（P < 0.05）。在LPS刺激的后备母猪中，厚壁菌门的丰度高于SAL刺激的动物。此外，限位栏饲养的LPS刺激后备母猪中的梭菌属比限位栏饲养的SAL刺激后备母猪中更丰富。室内群养的LPS刺激后备母猪中的芽孢杆菌属和葡萄球菌属比同一饲养系统中的SAL后备母猪中更丰富。户外饲养的后备母猪在LPS刺激后阴道微生物群没有变化。限位栏饲养的后备母猪出现泌尿生殖系统感染的临床症状，而户外饲养和室内群养的后备母猪则没有。环境、免疫反应和微生物群之间的关系表明，处于恶劣环境中的动物在应对刺激时会遇到困难，其阴道微生物群也会因此发生改变，正常阴道微生物群的丰富度降低，机会性细菌增加。然而，通过后备母猪对饲养系统的反应来衡量的福利指标并不能完全解释与不同饲养系统中阴道微生物群独特特征相关的机制。
Zotero 插件
